PC PACKET 08.08.2024 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Frenchman Place 51 Addition Page 2 The property to the north is zoned Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R-5) and is occupied by an apartment. The property to the east, south, and west are zoned General Business (C-2) and is occupied by a medical office buildings and a daycare. The property to the west is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) and is occupied by a grocery store, restaurant, and retail uses. B. Existing Site Characteristics The property is vacant and has some wetlands on site. The property is bisected diagonally by a 50-foot wide utility transmission line easement. The property also has a sanitary sewer easement running north to south through the site. 3. BACKGROUND: The applicant proposed the rezoning and a different plan with the sketch plan review process in late 2022. The EDA, Planning Commission, and City Council all commented on the plans and rezoning of the property from commercial to multi-family residential. The EDA generally agreed that a multi-family residential use on the property may be more viable than commercial uses, since the visibility is not great. They stated that there is commercial along CSAH 8 and it does fulfill the vision of the City to have commercial uses along CSAH 8. They states that the property is the back side of the commercial uses and would allow residents to walk to the adjacent commercial uses. The Planning Commission and City Council generally felt comfortable with an apartment use on the commercially-zoned property. They did have concerns about the sketch plan in regards to building placement, circulation, and access points. They stated this is an important location in the area. The existing development in the area is well planned and has quality architecture and building materials. They encouraged the creation of a plan that blends in with the surrounding development. The proposed plans seems to have addressed the concerns the Commission and Council expressed. The applicant attend a Parks Commission meetings this year to discuss the proposed public park. The update for that is in the Park Dedication/Openspace section of this report. 4. ANALYSIS: A. Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City has discretion in approving or denying a comprehensive plan amendment on whether or not the proposed project has impacts on regional systems including transportation, wastewater and regional parks. The City has a higher level of discretion with a comprehensive plan because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards. The City has discretion in approving or denying rezoning applications, based on whether or not the proposed project meets the standards outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements. If the City finds that all the applicable standards are met, the rezoning